|
Post by coachdoc on Dec 11, 2021 20:31:41 GMT -5
Yes I do.
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Dec 11, 2021 21:17:02 GMT -5
I disagree.
|
|
|
Post by gbacklin on Dec 11, 2021 22:21:53 GMT -5
You know, I have never been so surprised and disappointed as this whole virus experience has played and continues to play out. It was serious as the amount of fatalities and suffering from surviving family, friends as I too have lost close members. Im not going to even debate that, what I am disappointed is how I am seeing that the non actual virus symptoms from the actual virus, are becoming more damaging with long term affects. Ive mentioned it before. The hate for unvaccinated, is worse than any racial, religious or nationality, I have personally witnessed. Im not speaking of the past, with the outright violence of racial (including American Indians), religious or nationality, I am talking just my personal observations. I saw racial gang violence in my neighborhood many times; even directed at me, where I was a victim, but this today is different from my past observations. I am not being sarcastic here, it is an honest question. I get that the unvaccinated are more likely to be hospitalized, however I will say that a close relative fully vaccinated with boosters, two weeks ago, was one day away from the ICU, and went in for antibody treatment before symptoms started to ease. What I dont understand is what I keep hearing. That is. The unvaccinated are dangerous to the vaccinated. Even when it was the unvaccinated that had to wear the masks, but not the vaccinated. It was my understanding that the mere purpose of the vaccine was to minimize the main symptom of lung damage causing the fatalities, and that is what the vaccine did. It was reducing the fatalities especially with the elderly after the disaster in the nursing homes. The vaccine was not developed to prevent spreading as anyone infected, can spread. Thus later the masks for both, but initially it was unvaccinated only. You would read the unvaccinated were killers to the responsible folks who are vaccinated. If anything, if the virus was life threatening, to anyone, it would seem to the unvaccinated. Why the hate ? This was a sample post that I saw. What would have been the reaction if the statement was about race, religion or nationality or even sexual preference, but its ok about the unvaccinated. From what I am watching evolve before me. Im afraid that the long term damage from the virus, will be from hate rather than the symptoms. Im not talking death count, but who is to say that some who are being vilified, may eventually take their own life because of it. This would not be a traceable statistic related to the virus, but definitely a side effect. I wish I had an answer, but in the meantime I will hope and pray for some form of healing, because it is not healthy at the current moment. Once again, I am not minimizing the virus, not arguing vax or no vax, I am just seeing a situation of hate, where there is no vax for that and the damage could result in the same outcome as the virus.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Dec 11, 2021 23:31:52 GMT -5
I didn’t read the whole post, Gene. But I think your teacher’s post deserves as much condemnation as any racist statement. Period.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Dec 12, 2021 0:57:44 GMT -5
I don't get it either, Gene.
Ok, I'm a football fan in general and a Vikings fan in particular. And normally, the comments in the sports page after a football game are about the game and the performance of the players on the field. But now, instead of discussing Kirk Cousins' touchdown passes or his interceptions, there is a determined cadre of punks who attack the comment section and berate him for not having chosen to get vaccinated. And not just idiots on the comment section, columnists for the paper have offered their Cousins' character assessments based solely on his vac decision.
Ok, it is true in this new crazy world that vac status has become part of the football betting line, but the anti-anti-vacers are over the line and determined to get their viscous little shots in at any opportunity no matter how inappropriate. Cousins could throw ten touchdown passes in a game, and there will be flock of commentators ignoring the performance and ripping him for not being vaccinated.
Ok, it's just the sports pages and the sub-set of fans that bother to comment in the comment section is over-represented by punks and idiots, but I have spent most of my life reading the sports page, and never, never, have I witnessed such an insertion of politics into such an essentially non-political sphere. It is disgusting. "He's a dirty Trumper" "He's not vaccinated" "he hunts and kills fish" "he hates America" ad nauseum.
Hey, I've gotten three shots and am waiting on the Israelis before deciding whether or not to get a fourth. I think they are a great idea and should definitely be recommended and encouraged, but, holy pigskin, these anti-anti-vacers, give it a break. If a player is a thug and criminal, throw him out and jail him if you can, but otherwise, his, or her, personal life and personal choices are just that. Give it a break. Give it all a break.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Dec 12, 2021 1:13:42 GMT -5
From the start of training camp to the present, the Vikings have placed 14 players on their Covid list (test positive and have to sit out away from the team for a given period). The group has included both vaccinated and unvaccinated players. Per my understanding, none experienced anything other than no symptoms or mild symptoms and none had any trouble returning full speed after the 5-7 day sit out period.
It will be interesting whenever the effect of Covid on pro athletes is quantified. The Wild had one player get hit hard and it took him several months to get back on the ice, but other than that, I am aware of no MN sports team that has had a player out more than a week or whose performance was affected by Covid.
On a more disturbing and personal note, it appears Covid loves to hide out in fat cells. Might get that fourth shot tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Dec 12, 2021 2:58:47 GMT -5
There's been some reporting that having had covid and then getting vaxed provides excellent further results,
...but I haven't read anything about a vaxed person, who later turns positive (perhaps with no serious effects) also gaining better immunity.
I wonder what's going on there.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Dec 12, 2021 8:02:22 GMT -5
You know, I have never been so surprised and disappointed as this whole virus experience has played and continues to play out. It was serious as the amount of fatalities and suffering from surviving family, friends as I too have lost close members. Im not going to even debate that, what I am disappointed is how I am seeing that the non actual virus symptoms from the actual virus, are becoming more damaging with long term affects. Ive mentioned it before. The hate for unvaccinated, is worse than any racial, religious or nationality, I have personally witnessed. Im not speaking of the past, with the outright violence of racial (including American Indians), religious or nationality, I am talking just my personal observations. I saw racial gang violence in my neighborhood many times; even directed at me, where I was a victim, but this today is different from my past observations. I am not being sarcastic here, it is an honest question. I get that the unvaccinated are more likely to be hospitalized, however I will say that a close relative fully vaccinated with boosters, two weeks ago, was one day away from the ICU, and went in for antibody treatment before symptoms started to ease. What I dont understand is what I keep hearing. That is. The unvaccinated are dangerous to the vaccinated. Even when it was the unvaccinated that had to wear the masks, but not the vaccinated. It was my understanding that the mere purpose of the vaccine was to minimize the main symptom of lung damage causing the fatalities, and that is what the vaccine did. It was reducing the fatalities especially with the elderly after the disaster in the nursing homes. The vaccine was not developed to prevent spreading as anyone infected, can spread. Thus later the masks for both, but initially it was unvaccinated only. You would read the unvaccinated were killers to the responsible folks who are vaccinated. If anything, if the virus was life threatening, to anyone, it would seem to the unvaccinated. Why the hate ? This was a sample post that I saw. What would have been the reaction if the statement was about race, religion or nationality or even sexual preference, but its ok about the unvaccinated. From what I am watching evolve before me. Im afraid that the long term damage from the virus, will be from hate rather than the symptoms. Im not talking death count, but who is to say that some who are being vilified, may eventually take their own life because of it. This would not be a traceable statistic related to the virus, but definitely a side effect. I wish I had an answer, but in the meantime I will hope and pray for some form of healing, because it is not healthy at the current moment. Once again, I am not minimizing the virus, not arguing vax or no vax, I am just seeing a situation of hate, where there is no vax for that and the damage could result in the same outcome as the virus. Can't like this post enough.
|
|
|
Post by james on Dec 12, 2021 9:27:26 GMT -5
Who knew that people sometimes responded to others with intemperate and ill-judged comments on their Facebook pages?!. 😮
I have seen a hell of a lot worse.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Dec 12, 2021 9:30:11 GMT -5
Our state health department has just started reporting cases and deaths by vaccination status. The first report, for October, says that the unvaccinated were 3.9 times as likely to test positive as fully vaccinated people were and 15.2 times as likely to die. azdhs.gov/covid19/documents/data/rates-of-cov-19-by-vaccination.pdfMeanwhile, the supply of hospital beds is as low as it has been during the pandemic. If we're going to see a surge from Christmas and/or the omicron variant, this is not where you want to be starting.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Dec 12, 2021 9:31:58 GMT -5
PS: I've never heard anyone express hate towards the unvaccinated. I have heard angry comments about them several times in recent weeks. Hate and anger are not the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Dec 12, 2021 9:43:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Dec 12, 2021 10:23:45 GMT -5
PS: I've never heard anyone express hate towards the unvaccinated. I have heard angry comments about them several times in recent weeks. Hate and anger are not the same thing. A perfectly meaningless distinction.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Dec 12, 2021 11:52:51 GMT -5
Anger passes. Hate endures.
|
|
|
Post by TKennedy on Dec 12, 2021 19:15:15 GMT -5
I was just thinking about the current pandemic and perspective. About what our parents and grandparents lived through and low and behold a friend posted this on Facebook today. Pretty much what I had been thinking about.
For a small amount of perspective at this moment, imagine you were born in 1900. When you are 14, World War I starts, and ends on your 18th birthday with 22 million people killed. Later in the year, a Spanish Flu epidemic hits the planet and runs until you are 20. Fifty million people die from it in those two years. Yes, 50 million.
When you're 29, the Great Depression begins. Unemployment hits 25%, global GDP drops 27%. That runs until you are 33. The country nearly collapses along with the world economy. When you turn 39, World War II starts. You aren’t even over the hill yet.
When you're 41, the United States is fully pulled into WWII. Between your 39th and 45th birthday, 75 million people perish in the war and the Holocaust kills six million. At 52, the Korean War starts and five million perish.
At 64 the Vietnam War begins, and it doesn’t end for many years. Four million people die in that conflict. Approaching your 62nd birthday you have the Cuban Missile Crisis, a tipping point in the Cold War. Life on our planet, as we know it, could well have ended. Great leaders prevented that from happening.
As you turn 75, the Vietnam War finally ends. Think of everyone on the planet born in 1900. How do you survive all of that? A kid in 1985 didn’t think their 85 year old grandparent understood how hard school was. Yet those grandparents (and now great grandparents) survived through everything listed above.
Perspective is an amazing art. Let’s try and keep things in perspective. Let’s be smart, help each other out, and we will get through this. In the history of the world, there has never been a storm that lasted. This too, shall pass.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Dec 12, 2021 19:22:19 GMT -5
Good post, Terry.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Dec 25, 2021 8:12:52 GMT -5
And we tend to believe anyone who does not accept that evidence/opinion as truth, much have nefarious intentions in their disbelief. Or at least they are knee-jerk following the opinions of other people who have ulterior motives in their desire to discredit the evidence we believe. I think we are crippled in our ability to even discuss the problem ... and even the suggestion that there is a problem tips my hand. Most accept that our extreme polarity is a problem. But even those who admit that it is a problem mean (by the admission) that those who don't believe as "we" do are extreme. "They" are the problem. "They" represent polarity. "We", on the other hand, are not extreme. We just believe the truth. But I think it's more insidious than that. Brian Williams recently quit in a huff. And in so doing -- by his little quitting speech -- incidentally revealed one of the things that is at the core of the problem. And why we can't have fruitful discussions (much less, solutions) rests in our even lacking a useful vocabulary by which to discuss it. Williams, believing himself representative of the reasonable, thoughtful moderate, referred to himself as neither "right" nor "left" but an "Institutionalist". He believes in the institutions. As such, he sees those who think as I do are a threat to his conviction that the institutions are worth saving at any cost. He feels as though the previous 4 years -- represented in his mind as Trump having threatened the institutions -- was an existential threat to all he holds dear. All he believes in. And there is no act too extreme when faced with such a threat to the institutions. There is no act that is wrong when the threat is so great. Rahabs of the world, unite. And a great deal of the problem lies in the ability to question the institutions. We don't have the vocabulary by which to do it. Every attempt to do so is met with cries of "You see a conspiracy everywhere!" ...along with the Jon Stewart-like smirk that always effectively shuts the questions down without a discussion. The institutionalists cannot even "steel man" the argument that those who are questioning the institutions are even making. They are so quickly satisfied by the answers and the smirks given to the questions, but they could not describe our complaint for us in words that we would use to describe the problem as we see it. They cannot "steel man" our argument. Further, it is not possible to voice the complaint because there is not a useful vocabulary by which to do it. "Institutional corruption" is almost impossible to discuss. In large part that is because the word "corruption", while accurate, is also needlessly incendiary. Corruption has come to imply something that is not necessarily being accused -- an immoral intent. There's no other word than "corrupt" to use, but it doesn't work because it almost necessarily carries with it the unintended meaning that the corruption has occurred by immoral (evil) intent. Ironically, that's exactly the opposite of what is intended, though. Though institutional corruption might, could, and has occurred by immoral intent (a person or group with a selfish motive to enrich or empower themselves).... ....it is my guess that most institutional corruption actually occurs as good people with good intentions nevertheless alter the institutions because they see (by the inherent weakness of the institution, or by wishing it could do more or better) how they hope the institution could achieve a lofty goal. Institutional corruption isn't bad people with evil intent. It is good people with lofty goals. So any time the institutions are even questioned, people who believe in them are immediately put on the defensive because they immediately hear themselves being accused of being evil people. If I said that I have a computer program that doesn't work because it was corrupted, nobody would read a moral element into my use of the word "corrupted". But if I question any of the institutions -- academia, journalism, government -- of being corrupted, the discussion is immediately over because I can't make even the suggestion of such corruption without those involved in those endeavors (academia, journalism, government) hearing me calling them evil. Even though "evil" is the last thing on my mind. Institutions aren't corrupted by bad people with evil intentions. Institutions are corrupted by good people with lofty goals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2021 8:15:58 GMT -5
I think "ineptitude" would be a better word than "corruption" in many cases. See DoD for an example.
But "ineptitude" in DoD's case would still require several volumes to adequately explain it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2021 8:22:48 GMT -5
PS, John - You should have quit worrying about what Chinook Boy said about anything years ago. Open Mouth, Export Lie. Yeesh.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Dec 25, 2021 8:24:21 GMT -5
Who is Chinook Boy?
|
|